by Daniel Greenfield
After several previous censorship drives, the Left's latest coordinated campaign to censor the political opposition over global warming is underway.
At least they're not beating around the bush anymore.
After several previous censorship drives, the Left's latest coordinated campaign to censor the political opposition over global warming is underway.
And we can see how the speech cartel functions in real-time.
1. Big Tech companies like Google, Facebook, and Twitter have announced new censorship measures aimed at the conservative political opposition this time over their political position on global warming. This follows previous censorship campaigns over everything from the 2020 election to the origins of the coronavirus.
2. The Center for Countering Digital Hate issues a "report" providing guidance of which conservative sites should be censored. (Answer: all of them.) The organization is heavily entwined with the British Labour Party and its censorship agenda has long since moved beyond any pretense of fighting hate to censoring a variety of mainstream conservative views.
3. The Washington Post, owned by Amazon's Jeff Bezos, and a variety of other leftist media outlets publish advocacy pieces on the report.
The whole purpose of this artificial echo chamber is to play the old speech cartel game of inventing a speech crisis, urging censorship, and then implementing censorship while pretending that the different players in the cartel are different components of civil society, rather than arms of the same octopus.
The Center for Countering Digital Hate names the "Toxic 10" sites that disagree with its politics on global warming.Its full report actually names target sites that include PJ Media, the Washington Times, Breitbart, Townhall, Western Journal, Newsmax, Red State, Twitchy, CNS, MRC, the Daily Wire, Patriot Post, and well, pretty much the entire conservative internet.
CCDH declares, "Social media’s Toxic Ten are repeat offenders that have spread disinformation about climate change for years. It’s time for social media to stop powering their pollution for profit."
I like how speech is being defined as "pollution".
CCDH and its Democrat media allies make some noises about trying to link conservative sites to Exxon, but opposition to global warming measures are pretty universal among conservatives. Opposing plots to take away our cars or tax every mile we travel, to raise fuel and home heating prices, and take away the jobs of coal miners, is not something inspired by a secretive campaign by Exxon.
It's simple common sense. Not to mention self-interest.
The Washington Post's push for censoring conservative sites falsely describes the CCDH as being "shared exclusively with The Washington Post" (it's shared exclusively with anyone who uses Twitter), and warns of "climate disinformation, including articles that undermine the existence or impacts of climate change or misrepresent data in ways that might erode trust in climate science experts."
So we've gone from "medical misinformation" to "climate misinformation". The chicken little crisis is urgent which means that anyone who disagrees must be censored. We can't have any science going on here.
The Washington Post's Cat Zakrzewski makes no bones about this being a push for censorship.
"While the report doesn’t provide a comprehensive look at all misleading climate change content promoted on Facebook, it has the potential to inspire political action as CCDH has historically captured policymakers’ attention."
You don't say.
"One November 2020 post from the Federalist Papers, a conservative news site, says that the Biden administration’s commitment to climate action is 'all based on a lie.' It linked to an article saying climate scientists shouldn’t be believed."
Which is now a crime.
So the operative question, as I asked earlier today, is which core conservative belief will be banned next.
We've seen the speech cartel composed of Big Tech, media, and leftist politicians slicing the onion by banning one conservative belief after another. What's next, pro-life views being banned under the guise of "medical misinformation" or "misogyny", opposition to critical race theory being banned on account of "social misinformation" or "racism", and opposition to high taxes being banned as "economic misinformation"?
The Ministry of Truth is always open and as long as Big Tech and the speech cartel exist, the First Amendment is becoming a dead letter.
Daniel Greenfield
Source: https://www.frontpagemag.com/point/2021/11/washington-post-demands-elimination-conservative-daniel-greenfield/
No comments:
Post a Comment